“The Lottery”, the short story written by Shirley Jackson in
1948, is not about your ordinary lottery that we have today. “The Lottery”,
placed on a “full-summer day” in a small rural community, results in a stoning
of a mother, who did not appreciate what she truly had. Therefore, due to the
selection chosen from the black box, some readers would argue that the mother,
Tessie Hutchinson, got what she deserved. Because of the descriptive
characteristics of the people and the setting of the story, the shock and horror
are prevalent in Shirley Jackson’s “graphic demonstration”.
Most
writers use descriptive characteristics for a plethora of reasons. However, it
is evident that Shirley Jackson achieves an aspect of shock and horror through
her use of describing her characters separately and in groups, with families.
The horror can be noticed by looking at specific characters in her story “The
Lottery”, such as Mr. Summers, Tessie Hutchinson, and Old Man Warner. Mr.
Summers is described as “roundfaced” and “jovial”, and “people were sorry for
him, because he had no children and his wife was a scold” (Jackson, 195). Mr.
Summers is in charge of the entire lottery. He is looked at as a boss to some
as “he ran the coal business”. In writing horror and shock, Jackson uses Mr.
Summers as a representation of someone to give authority; he is a character
that the individuals will trust when it comes down to a feeble time of hope and
faith. Tessie Hutchinson, a possibly too proud mother, decides to stick up for
her family when it is time for her son and others mentioned to receive their
tickets; she does not know when to really “shut up”. When it was her turn to
get her slip of paper, her husband, Bill, “forced the slip of paper out of her
hand” (Jackson, 201). She increasingly and inevitably becomes the victim in
this “graphic demonstration”. Mrs. Hutchinson plays a big part in the
development of Jackson’s short story from the middle of the story to the end.
Old Man Warner, who is the oldest man in the village, said “seventy-seventh
time” as he walked up to get his ticket. To turn the reader’s attention to
shock again, the old man serves as a creepy know-it-all, a very superstitious man.
Tessie Hutchinson shows herself to be selfish and worrisome when dealing with
the lottery in the story, but when she is with her family, she hides the future
from coming out. The Hutchinsons serve as the host of the bad luck when it
comes to the community. When one of the stand-by characters states “she came
after all, Bill”, the relationship between Tessie and her husband Bill
digresses out. With the separation and lack of faith in each other, also shown
with the drafting of the ticket, bad relations involve predetermining bad
characters. Since Tessie could have been dealing with relationship issues,
those problems could have foreshadowed her uncivil circumstance, showing a “getting
what you deserve” motto. Unlike the Hutchinsons, the Delacroix family served as
a family who represented normal, although the town had to emphasize the pronunciation
of their name. You could distinguish their role in the community, as the son of
the Delacroix’s originally participated in getting stones, and the other child
from the Hutchinsons did not. These comparisons reveal a tense moment that just
increases until the story ends. All characters take part in revealing their
secret parts in her “graphic demonstration”, whether that means being a leader
down the wrong path or the family that is terrorized from the beginning.
The setting
plays a gigantic role in proving horror and shock as an element in “The Lottery”.
Shirley Jackson uses words such as “clear and sunny”, “flowers were blossoming
profusely”, and “richly green”. To dissect the setting to find its horror, one
would have to know the beginning and ending and where it ended. Since we can
detect no setting change in the story, we, the third person readers, expect
something beautiful to happen according to the first two sentences. The
assumption of a stable environment confuses the reader and shocks the reader
when the disastrous continuous event occurs.
In “The
Lottery”, Shirley Jackson does a great example of presenting a horrible
tradition to most minds, but also, she delivers a knowledgeable story
reflecting society in general. Without the horror aspect created from the
characters and the setting, most readers would not have been so attached to it.
I love this David! In the beginning, you pointed out that some would argue "Tessie Hutchinson, got what she deserved". When reading that statement, I truly identified with how often many people do result to that statement,"They got what they deserved". I personally think that you are correct that that particular mindset and thought process is often used when people of societies try to cover up, ignore, and for lack of a better term, put societal issues on the back burner. The use of calling each member by first name, "Tessie, Bill, Martin" illustrates how small and tight knit the citizens of of the village were. What is causing NO ONE to stand up?
ReplyDeleteFor example, African Americans in the United States were often time oppressed, and treated inhumanely. It is said that some whites believed that "God was telling them to perform these actions", acts of evil. My question is are the characters in "The Lottery" brainwashed? Or are they cowards? Is this all they know, so there is no need for them to claim responsibility to defend their close and well-known members? In this story, where are the Martin Luther Kings and the women like Rosa Parks?
Also, at the end you said the use of characters and setting created a sense of attachment in order to display a horror.You are spot on on that one! I want to know the most shocking part for everyone was? For me, the line, "The children had stones already, and some gave little Davy Hutchinson a few pebbles". The fact that he has the ability to stone his own mother, truly illustrates the horror within this story.
VW,
DeleteThanks for commenting! I thought it was pretty messed up on how nobody stood up for her, but I believe that it is because the lottery is a tradition. The community thought it was okay to happen. Jackson even pointed out that Mrs. Delacroix grabbed the largest stone. I like how you pointed out African-American history as well. Throughout that time, MLK and many other people stood up for what they believed in, but that was in a time of oppression, not a societal norm.
David
David and Veronica, I think this is an interesting connection to make between "The Lottery" and the civil rights movement in America. To add to David's comment, I think what made the bigotry of pre-60s and 70s America so haunting is that the oppression WAS a societal norm. Most citizens didn't consider segregated schools, drinking fountains, libraries, busses, etc. as oppressive. They just saw it as life, routine, tradition.
DeleteEven slavery, the most obvious form of oppression, was difficult for even those opposed to it to stop. Many arguments for keeping the slave trade open was that people were just used to it! They didn't know how to grow their crops or till their land without these unpaid servants to slave over it for them. I think maybe that is one theme we can pull from Jackson's story: sometimes what is most dangerous about oppression is that it can become a societal norm.
I think it's important that we remember that there are distinct differences in the case of the civil rights movement and this particular example of inhumanity.
ReplyDeleteThe characters in "The Lottery" are participating, as they say many times, in a Tradition. They don't know any other way (199). And to those people, the tradition worked. They thought the Lottery caused good harvests.
The people who stood up for African American rights did so because what they experiences WASN'T a tradition overall.
They had lived their lives alongside those of whites in America, who obviously had the freedoms and the respect African Americans wanted. That contrast is what allowed them to stand up and demand more. Without that contrast, who's to know there is anything better?
Even though the participants of the Lottery had heard of other towns thinking about giving it up, they hadn't seen a standard of comparison yet. After all, the other towns are only THINKING about it (199).
African Americans before the 60's may have had a standard of living that was imposed upon them for generations; however, they lived in the same towns and cities as white people. Imagine. You're coming home from work with your friend, who happens to be white. He wears the same uniform as you, talks the same as you, and has the same amount of schooling as you. But you stop at a luncheonette and he can go in the front and you can't. That very obvious comparison is what inspires people to rebel against their current situation.
Maybe, if someone from a different town, a city maybe, came to live with his or her grandparents in the village, a Parks or King could emerge. The fact is though, that in this little universe Jackson constructed, there's not. Which isn't to say there won't ever be. Maybe this little story is a prelude to the world waking up and taking action.
Serena, I enjoyed how you made a point. It is so true, would their be more attempt to alleviate the absurd societal norm if someone was looking from the outside in. What a great point!
DeleteIt still confuses me why someone would not stand up against the tradition, Yes, African Americans were sticking up for those of their race, but do you think that maybe the fact that throughout the story all of the characters know one another by name, would cause them to care about one another more than these acts of repetition. I think it is far from a prelude of the world waking up, and taking action. To me, the abrupt ending cannot help, but leave the reader shocked, hopeless, and confused.
This story depicts the stagnant ways of society.
Aryn, the statement of race was not used to offend anyone, it was to illustrate that just as the citizens of the village in "The Lottery" believe that what they are doing is tradition and do not find it as act of evil, causes them to be somewhat similar to the whites in the sense that whites justified their actions as well. Sorry if my incite made anyone feel uncomfortable, I hope that clarified.To answer your question, what causes some to justify stoning and some to see it as a cruel action. I think, if you teach a person from a formative age to feel and believe something, they often times will continue to feel and believe that certain something for a lifetime. If you grow up watching your parents using stoning to execute, abuse to punish, or criticism to hurt, you may end up recreating that lifestyle and doing the same thing to your children. It is all about perspective. Obviously, most of us see the stoning as cruel, but who knows, someone around the world may be used to witnessing that on a daily basis.
I almost wish this story had some sort of first person expression instead of third person perspective. Do the characters struggle with guilt, or are they so immune to this, they do not even feel it?
I enjoy reading and sharing thoughts with all of you! I feel lucky to be in a group of such bright thinkers! Way to go!
Oh race, not the kind of thing I really enjoy talking about. I feel someone will always find a way to be offended so I think I am going to stick to commenting about David's paper. David I am a little confused with your conclusion. How does she deliver "a knowledgeable story reflecting society in general" by "shocking" and "horrifying" the reader with "descriptive characteristics of the people and the setting of the story"? And do you feel that "Tessie Hutchinson got what she deserved"? Should anyone "deserve" to be stoned?
ReplyDeleteI understand the "race" comment; most people do not like talking about it either. She points out to society that norms may be different in different cultures. We may consider the stoning as horrible, whereas the community takes it as a simple tradition. The characteristics and setting lead up to the overall action of the stoning. Most of the characters, those who go along with the "black box", are foreshadowing what is happening. Each character attributes their own to the story. The setting makes the reader believe everything is great when it is not. Tessie Hutchinson did get what she deserved in the sense that she was selfish and tried to not be the center of attention. Usually, nobody should deserve to be stoned unless it is for execution reasons. Of course, just like Jackson stated that this was a graphic demonstration of an ancient rite in her community, stoning serves as a symbolic traditions that other countries have.
DeleteDavid, I enjoyed your post. Although the entire thing was thought provoking, it was the second to last paragraph that stood out the most to me. It is short, but carries a lot of weight when it comes to the attitude displayed in the story. The fact that nobody in this community is increasingly saddened by the horrific "tradition" is creepy (intentionally so). Not only are these people not saddened, but they are almost delighted! As you point out in your post, Jackson uses very light-hearted descriptive terms to embody the atmosphere (clear and sunny, richly green.) The reader obviously doesn't suspect anything malicious...and BOOM. It just hits you that some random individual is about to lose their life for no apparent reason (or maybe an unerlying reason, as you point out.) I think that Jackson does this on purpose in order to give the situation that much more absurdity. She goes to the extreme in order to show people what they unconciously do not see. I, for one, did not expect the ending.
ReplyDelete